Legal Opinion

Perkins v. Webster

Superior Court of New Hampshire

Decided October 15, 1820PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Jt. corve ved fo B, by deed “a certain piece of land, the whole of lot No. *• exet-pr 50 acres deeded to S. P the lot to contain 200 acres by measure, be-vidi <⅝ *V 50 acres this was hsid to be mere description, and not to amount to a covenant that the lot contained 200 acres besides the 50 acres. This was an action of covenant broken.

Read the full summary

Jt. corve ved fo B, by deed “a certain piece of land, the whole of lot No. *• exet-pr 50 acres deeded to S. P the lot to contain 200 acres by measure, be-vidi <⅝ *V 50 acres this was hsid to be mere description, and not to amount to a covenant that the lot contained 200 acres besides the 50 acres. This was an action of covenant broken. The plaintiff alleged, in his declaration, that the defendant, by deed, dated March 26, 1817, conveyed to the plaintiff a tract of land in Springfield, being the whole of lot No. 20, excepting 50 aCres conveyed to S. Webster, and in and by the same dee*…

1Opinion of the Court

By the court.

If we were to give the least countenance to the opinion, that loose and doubtful expressions, used in the description of lands in deeds of conveyance, may be construed as covenants, it would lead to endless litigation and fraud. They would be easily inserted by the artful and designing in any deed; and the simple and uninformed might be readily entrapped by them, without the least suspicion.

In the present case, we cannot construe the phrase, “ the “ lot to contain two hundred acres by measure,” as a covenant, that it contained that quantity, but consider it merely as a part of…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Powell v. ClarkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API